Comments

I’m slightly disappointed by the petition. They shouldn’t just be opposing it on the basis that his paper is mean. They should be opposing it on the basis that it’s bull hockey. Never mind the odious claim he’s making; the paper itself is garbage from a scientific standpoint, and should never have been accepted.

I wasn’t aware Charles Murray was a big defender of this guy, but upon reflection it isn’t surprising.

I am surprised this cod-swallow got past the committee’s review – any explanation about what they were thinking? Since they seem to be trying to have it both ways (his empirical work is strong but we don’t like what he says) it would seem they have much to account for.